The ovaries of the female hammerheads are suspended from mesenteries well forward in the body cavity in a position analogous to that of the testes in the male. In the hammerheads only one ovary is developed and functional (moss 1984). When the development is complete the eggs burst from the ovaries into the body cavity. These female sharks have sperm stored inside them from the last copulation. This enables the eggs to immediately be fertilized. In hammerheads, after the rupture of the fragile shell , the embryo establishes a placental connection with the endometrium of the maternal uterus. This shark placenta is functionally similar to that found in mammals. In the placenta maternal blood and that of the fetus are able to exchange oxygen, nutrients, and waste products across the thinnest possible membranous barrier. Observations of courtship and mating among sharks has been rare. Most of what is believed has been inferred, and not actually seen.
I was looking to see if there's an evostory for hammerheads when I came across this fact. (As expected, they have nothing beyond "see how cool this design is - that's why it must've evolved".)
Anyhow, that's pretty broken. Sharks aren't even "bony fish" (the kind that supposedly grew legs and lungs and "gave rise to amphibians").
If we can collect more examples of whacky broken "homology" it might make for an amusing thread. There's some protein or something we have which makes the dandelion "our closest relative" but I have forgotten (obviously) the details.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth
"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm
"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
Re: Is "homology" broken or what?
[Re: CTD]
#55515 01/30/1002:36 AM01/30/1002:36 AM
Scientists have found a striking similarity in the DNA that enables some bats and dolphins to echolocate.
A key gene that gives their ears the ability to detect high-frequency sound has produced the exact same amino acid changes over time in both creatures.
...
Two studies published this week in Current Biology find that this gene in bats and dolphins has picked up the same mutations over time.
"We've found a whole suite of amino acid changes that are common to these two groups that have evolved in parallel, convergently," Dr Rossiter said.
People will say anything. Amazing...
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth
"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm
"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
Re: Is "homology" broken or what?
[Re: CTD]
#55554 02/01/1008:08 PM02/01/1008:08 PM
Scientists have found a striking similarity in the DNA that enables some bats and dolphins to echolocate.
A key gene that gives their ears the ability to detect high-frequency sound has produced the exact same amino acid changes over time in both creatures.
...
Two studies published this week in Current Biology find that this gene in bats and dolphins has picked up the same mutations over time.
"We've found a whole suite of amino acid changes that are common to these two groups that have evolved in parallel, convergently," Dr Rossiter said.
People will say anything. Amazing...
A little more detail can be found, as one would expect.
"The natural world is full of examples of species that have evolved similar characteristics independently, such as the tusks of elephants and walruses," said Stephen Rossiter of the University of London, an author on one of the studies. "However, it is generally assumed that most of these so-called convergent traits have arisen by different genes or different mutations. Our study shows that a complex trait -- echolocation -- has in fact evolved by identical genetic changes in bats and dolphins."
A hearing gene known as prestin in both bats and dolphins (a toothed whale) has picked up many of the same mutations over time, the studies show. As a result, if you draw a phylogenetic tree of bats, whales, and a few other mammals based on similarities in the prestin sequence alone, the echolocating bats and whales come out together rather than with their rightful evolutionary cousins.
And for a little more on the topic in general, you can't go wrong visiting
Crabs are believed to have evolved at least 5 times based on gene sequences.
They're very good, but a little soft, at least on one point:
Quote
Convergent and parallel evolution would not in themselves falsify evolution, if it were not for the vast number of occurrences found in nature.
Any "convergence / parallel evolution" at all renders the issue of "homology" useless for the evo-pusher at best. If you posit a rule that looking alike makes things related, you have to stick to that rule. You're not allowed to make exceptions - not in science. Any exception forces abandonment of the rule or abandonment of scientific principles, even if it were only one. Special pleading is special pleading - period.
But check it out. They only touch the very tip of the iceberg, of course, but they list quite a few examples of things some would sweep under the rug.
I know we don't have a lot of participation at the moment, but here's a challenge for any reader: try and posit a hard-and-fast rule of "homology" that isn't circular - or one that matches reality even if it is circular.
What do I mean by 'circular'? These things look alike because they're related because they look alike because they're related because they look alike because they're related because... - see, just going in circles.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth
"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm
"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
Re: Is "homology" broken or what?
[Re: CTD]
#58321 07/20/1007:13 AM07/20/1007:13 AM
Any "convergence / parallel evolution" at all renders the issue of "homology" useless for the evo-pusher at best. If you posit a rule that looking alike makes things related, you have to stick to that rule. You're not allowed to make exceptions - not in science. Any exception forces abandonment of the rule or abandonment of scientific principles, even if it were only one. Special pleading is special pleading - period.
And that ain't all. Check this out:
Quote
It is incredible that the descendants of two organisms, which had originally differed in a marked manner, should ever afterwards converge so closely as to lead to a near approach to identity throughout their whole organisation.
Guess who. Go on, guess.
That's from Chapter 4 of the sacred evotext - that's Charles Darwin himself.
See for yourself. Even he didn't have so much faith in the evogoddess of luck! "Convergent evolution" is officially un-Darwinian.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth
"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm
"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
Re: Is "homology" broken or what?
[Re: CTD]
#58963 09/06/1001:26 PM09/06/1001:26 PM
Once again, scientific evidence supports Creation, and yet, once again, scientists are looking for other ways to “interpret” newly discovered data. The latest evidence supporting creationism comes from the sea—the location evolutionists have suggested is the site of the origin of all life. Located around reefs and lagoons is a type of coral known by the scientific name of Acropora millepora. Coral is a marine colonial polyp characterized by a calcareous skeleton. Because evolutionists consider coral as quite primitive (i.e., it is an invertebrate that does not have a complex nervous system), they have assumed that the genes contained within this type of coral would differ greatly from that of humans. As Robert Saint of the Australian National University in Canberra noted: “The assumption was that coral would lack many of the genes found in higher animals” (as quoted in Dennis, 2003). However, the results of a comparative study tell an entirely different story.
...
The bottom line? The gene sequences found in this species of coral are closer to humans than they are to fruit flies or nematode roundworms.
...Seeking to establish A. millepora's place in this evolutionary history, Miller and his colleagues performed a genetic analysis on the coral's larval form. They identified DNA sequences known as expressed sequence tags (ESTs), which derive from active genes in tissue. All told, the scientists came up with almost 1,400 distinct coral ESTs.
Next, they scanned databases of other creatures' genes for DNA sequences that match the coral ESTs. The vast majority of the coral ESTs correspond to DNA sequences shared by all multicellular animals. However, about 12 percent of the coral ESTs had a corresponding human gene but no match in the worm and fly DNA. Until this finding, those human genes were presumed to be specific to vertebrates.
"The study makes clear that many genes previously thought to be vertebrate innovations were in fact invented long before the origin of the vertebrates," says Finnerty.
I notice a lack of the convergent evolution goddess in the excuses I've seen so far. Not yet sure if it's significant.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth
"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm
"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
By using this system, you agree to the Terms of Service. All posts on this forum are owned by whomever posted them. Orbis Vitae, Inc., and its officers, employees, stockholders, agents and affiliates are NOT responsible for for any information posted on this website. For more information, visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation. By using this system, you understand that the information displayed here is intended for educational and entertainment purposes only. NO OTHER PURPOSE IS INTENDED OR IMPLIED. NO information posted here is intended to prescribe medication or practice medicine, nor is it intended to prevent, treat or cure symptoms, conditions or diseases.
Circle-of-Life Forums - Welcome
![[Linked Image]](http://www.evidentcreation.com/image/It%20Evolved%20Sm.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.evidentcreation.com/image/Crab%20Body%20Plan%203.jpg)